Mali: a critical look at the regime’s responsibility amidst terrorism and political detentions
For a month now in Mali, Mountaga Tall, a prominent lawyer, former minister, and staunch advocate for democracy, has been held incommunicado by State Security, detained without legal basis. His son has suffered the same fate, alongside other pro-democracy activists, military personnel, and religious figures. These arbitrary arrests began in the wake of the extensive jihadist attacks on April 25, carried out by the Jnim and the independentist FLA. Mamadou Ismaïla Konaté, himself a lawyer, former Malian Minister of Justice, and an outspoken critic of the military regime that has governed for six years without elections, recently shared his perspective. Interviewed, he addressed Mountaga Tall’s plight, the questionable use of counter-terrorism efforts, and the perceived subservience of the Malian justice system. Konaté reiterated his firm opposition to jihadist terrorism, underscored the transitional government’s accountability, and explained his decision not to align with the Coalition of Forces for the Republic (CFR), an opposition alliance led by Imam Dicko.
It has been exactly one month since lawyer Mountaga Tall was abducted and held in an undisclosed location by State Security. His family, legal counsel, and the International Conference of Bar Associations have repeatedly called for his release or presentation before a judge, demanding respect for legal rights. Do you believe the Transitional Authorities are listening to these appeals?
Maître Konaté: While I am personally skeptical, these authorities must heed reason and the law. They need to understand that no one should be deprived of their liberty outside the legal framework. Even if we are not currently in a state governed by the rule of law, it is crucial to remind these authorities that a rule of law state is notably measured by how it treats its opponents, critics, and legal professionals. It is unacceptable for a citizen, who is a politician but also a lawyer, to be denied visits from doctors, let alone lawyers or even the President of the Bar Association. Following a strongly worded statement from the Bar President himself, the military authorities in Mali saw fit to target his son and abduct him. This is an escalation that cannot be tolerated.
Indeed, after Mountaga Tall, his own son and other political opponents faced the same fate, as did military and religious leaders. Military justice is reportedly investigating suspicions of complicity with armed groups during the April 25 attacks. No official link has been made between this investigation and these abductions, but the implicit strategy of the authorities, echoed by their supporters, is to justify this practice through the fight against terrorism. Does this approach resonate with a segment of the Malian population?
It is imperative to explain to these Malians that the fight against terrorism cannot justify legal insecurity. A military camp is not a judicial court. Lawful detention is demonstrable; arbitrary detention, however, thrives in secrecy, and we are witnessing a context of total arbitrariness. Today, it concerns Mountaga Tall, but tomorrow, it will involve many others. This is precisely why, even in a counter-terrorism context, it is vital to preserve the legal framework and ensure that justice is present from beginning to end. This is critical for the long-term security of the Sahel region.
Beyond this specific case, we observe that Malian justice sentenced former Prime Minister Moussa Mara to a year in prison for a tweet – where he expressed hope that “day” would succeed “night” – while supporters of the Transition can openly call for the lynching of pro-democracy activists or the burning of shops owned by Mauritanians. Is the Malian justice system compromised or simply subservient to the Transitional Authorities?
Undoubtedly, this justice system, which should uphold public order and security, appears to be yielding and is, today, rather submissive. This justice must recognize that it serves the State, the nation, and its people, not a specific regime, even if it is military. Judges must not lose sight of this fundamental principle.
But do judges have a choice? Are they not also fearful?
The law provides judges with the option to recuse themselves. Beyond any fear, judges today are allowing themselves to play a role that is detrimental to them and to the very concept of justice. From this perspective, they must simply realize that today is today, but justice will prevail tomorrow.
Following the April 25 attacks, the death of Minister Sadio Camara, and the capture of Kidal, some believed the military in power in Mali were weakened. Yet, the government does not appear to be faltering significantly?
It is indeed wavering! Obviously, terrorism has no place in society; it represents the negation of the social contract, of law, and of civil peace. However, it has become difficult today to ignore the responsibility of a government that itself seized power through force and maintains it through force and terror. The increasing exposure of the country and its citizens to growing dangers cannot be dissociated from the decisions made by those who have governed for six years. This situation is a significant concern for political Sahel stability and West Africa Sahel news observers.
You are an opponent of the Malian transitional authorities, as we understand, but you have not joined the CFR (Coalition of Forces for the Republic), Imam Dicko’s coalition. Why?
For the simple reason that today, we are caught between the military cap and the chechia (referring to religious/insurgent elements). The cap represents the seizure of power by force and its authoritarian exercise. Facing this, we have the chéchias, and it is important to remember that 2012 happened. 2012 saw hands and feet amputated in the northern regions of Mali…
During the period of occupation by jihadist groups…
Exactly. Those amputated hands and feet are still fresh in people’s minds. So, I fully support the idea that in the name of national unity and dialogue, we should all come together with the ultimate goal of restoring national cohesion. But for me, there are absolute prerequisites. One cannot emerge from a battlefield, armed and with munitions, to then sit at a table and simply erase everything that has transpired. In the same way that I vehemently oppose this military regime, which violates all rights and freedoms, I cannot truly support acts of terror or terrorists. There is an absolute prerequisite: we must address 2012. We must discuss that maleficent junction between the FLA and the Jnim. Today, there must be prerequisites for adherence to absolute principles and values which, for me, form the foundation of the Republic, democracy, and justice.
The AES regimes, in Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso, consistently assert that opposing them is tantamount to opposing the sovereignty of these three countries, aligning with enemies of the nation, terrorists, external interference, and media warfare. As a Malian, what are your thoughts, and how do you respond to this?
No one today can strip me of the label of Malian, patriot, and engaged citizen. What bothers these incumbent regimes, which themselves stem from illegality and fraud, is that they cannot tolerate being reminded of the law. They cannot tolerate being reminded of their own statements and commitments. But the true anti-patriots are those who starve citizens, who pervert liberties, and who annihilate the rule of law. This perspective is vital for a comprehensive Sahel Vision.
